Canadian authorities have stripped two former affiliates of the Islamic Society of North America’s Canada chapter (ISNA-Canada) of their charitable status after discovering financial ties between the Islamic organizations and a Pakistani militant group.

ISNA Islamic Services of Canada and the Canadian Islamic Trust Foundation lost their charity status for “non-compliance” following a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) audit, according to records acquired by Canada’s Global News.

The CRA discovered several issues during the audit, including evidence that ISNA Islamic Services facilitated donations that may have ended up in the hands of Hizbul Mujahideen (HM), a Kashmir-based militant group. According to the CRA report, the Toronto-based Jami Mosque raised and transferred funds to the ISNA Development Foundation “for remit” to the Relief Organization of Kashmiri Muslims (ROKM), a “charitable arm” associated with HM.

“Given the identified commonalities in directorship between ROKM and Jamaat-e-Islami and the Hizbul Mujahideen executive committee, concerns exist that the funds collected and disbursed as part of this relief fund may have been used to support the political efforts of Jamaat-e-Islami and/or its armed wing Hizbul Mujahideen,” the CRA said.

HM is designated as a terrorist organization by the European Union and India. In June, the State Department put HM’s leader, Syed Salahuddin, on its terrorist designations list, citing his threats to train suicide bombers in Kashmir and HM’s responsibility for several deadly terrorist attacks.

The 2013 CRA audit found numerous issues within the ISNA Development Foundation, including missing documentation, misleading financial reports, and sending donations abroad to unapproved groups. The ISNA affiliated organization engaged in these activities despite a stated purpose of serving the poor and needy in Canada.

A “very small portion … is distributed to the poor and needy and the major portion is spent on the administration of the centre,” concluded the 2010 audit. “Spending for personal expenses out of the charity’s funds is unethical,” the auditor wrote, saying it is “tantamount to misappropriation of funds.”

Criticizing Islam in Canada should not be illegal or disliking it should not be classified as a phobia. A “phobia” is a type of mental disorder. Isn’t the “Islamophobia” motion, which was unanimously passed by the Canadian government and calls for limiting the rights of Canadians to criticize Islam, contrary to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms? What is the purpose of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms then?

The definition of Islamophobia from a Google search is “dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.” What exactly has the Parliament of Canada made a motion against? Criticism of Islam? Criticism of Mohammed? Criticism and condemnation of the Islamic State and all Islamic terrorist groups affiliated with radical Islamic ideology? Petitioning against those Canadians who condemn Sharia law? If Canadians criticize Islam or convert from Islam, will they now be considered “Islamophobes” by Canada?

What’s next? Sending Iran and Hamas type morality police to the doorsteps of Canadians critical of Islam, while radical imams in the country continue to spew openly hateful and radical ideas in schools and mosques? What about Canadians who are suspicious of others plotting possible terrorist activities – will they be afraid to report it to authorities in case they are wrong?

The motion (M-103) which the Canadian government recently passed was initiated on June 8, 2016, by Samer Majzoub, president of the Canadian Muslim Forum. It condemns Islamophobia in “all” forms.

The details of the motion, which was sponsored by a member of parliament from the Liberal party, are extremely sketchy to say the least. The motion states:

“We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

It seems that many Western politicians, the mainstream media and our intellectual elites use the term “Islamophobia” without even knowing what is in Islam. There might be a lot of things about which one could be rationally “phobic,” or simply fearful of, in Islam.

Since Trudeau Liberals came to power, Canadians have been constantly reminded that to speak negatively about Islam is supposedly acting as a fear-mongering, racist, xenophobic, “Islamophobe.”

Yet, many people are rightfully afraid of harm coming to them from Islamic (sharia law) and radical or political Islam. I am a living example of one who has experienced harm from radical Islam.

I was imprisoned at age 16 by the Iranian regime for simply expressing my disagreement with their policies (which now might be viewed as Islamophobic in Canada). They held me prisoner for 18 months in their notorious Evin Prison; I miraculously escaped the murder and rape I heard about every day in that dark place.

The memories of my imprisonment still haunt me. And the regime’s threats still follow me today in Canada. Therefore, I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam. To call my fear a phobia, an irrational fear, lacks compassion and fails to recognize the true reality of the present danger living close to me once again.

It was reported that the highest commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards recently said they would soon kill all dissidents living abroad. That means I am on their hit list.

People are jittery about radical Islam and sharia law for many justifiable reasons: They look at how shariais practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, by the Islamic State and Nigeria’s Boko Haram.

The Islamic Cairo Declaration of 1990, written as a direct refutation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states that all human rights are defined under Islamic sharia law. Therefore, beheading, stoning, flogging, slavery, child marriage, wife-beating, amputations and a woman’s worth considered half of a man’s are all human rights.

Is that what we want for or in Canada? Or in any country?

To those of us who have experienced Islamic Sharia law first-hand, protecting Western values – free speech, common law, equal justice under the law, democratic (“man-made”) governance; individual freedoms, separation of church and state, an independent judiciary, to name just a few – is indeed a cause for concern. Every single one of them is contradicted by Islamic Sharia law or radical Islam.

Why should it be against the law to outspokenly disagree with aspects of a different political ideology, religion or culture? Especially if it outspokenly threatens one’s own?

It is interesting to note that there are no comparable terms for other religions, such as Christianophobia or Judeophobia that define a dislike or prejudice against Christianity, Judaism or the Judeo-Christian worldview.

What is true is that Christians and Jews would never be allowed to call for a similar motion in any Middle Eastern country in the world.

While M-103 has been stirring in our halls of government, there is also another trend sweeping through these same halls to rid the Canadian Charter of obsolete, unconstitutional or redundant laws, thanks to other Liberal MPs.

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, the liberals unveiled Bill C-51 that would clean up the Canadian Criminal Code. This Bill would remove the outdated blasphemy law that has existed in Canada since 1892. Government feels this would clean up old law that isn’t consistent with freedom of speech and religion in Canada.

Strangely, C-51 and M-103 seem to contradict one another. While M-103 condemns Islamophobia in all forms, including speaking against Islam, C-51 is loosening law to allow anyone to freely express themselves concerning anyone’s religion without fear of reprisal or imprisonment. Will C-51 only apply to every religion except Islam?

“Intolerance of Intolerance” is the de-facto blasphemy law of the secular state. Is the Government of Canada scrapping one blasphemy law, only to replace it with another?

The Canadian Tire Store where the attack occurred (Photo: Google Maps)

Toronto police said nothing on Saturday about the attack. Three days later, on Tuesday afternoon, after the Sun got wind of what happened, police issued a skeleton news release saying nothing about the niqab, the ISIS bandana or the common jihadi cry of “Allahu Akbar.”

“There is no need for the public to be concerned about safety in any way, shape or form,” Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders said late Tuesday. “It was a very isolated situation.”

*********************

An Islamist terrorist attack in Toronto is going all but ignored by city police and most Canadian news outlets.

A woman wearing the full-face Islamic veil and an Islamic State-type flag as a bandana shouted “Allahu Akbar” and began swinging a golf club at employees and a customer late Saturday afternoon at a Canadian Tire big-box hardware store. She also shouted death threats and support for the Islamic State.

When employees and customers tried to restrain her, the woman pulled a large knife from her clothing. “The store employee [who wrestled the knife out of her hand] sustained non-life-threatening injuries,” police later said.

In court Tuesday, the woman again appeared in a niqab (face veil) and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL). When asked her name, she said through an Arabic interpreter, “ISIS — I pledge to the leader of the believers, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.”

The woman, whose name is actually Rahab Dughmosh, was charged with two counts of assault with a weapon, uttering death threats and weapons offenses.

Earlier Saturday afternoon, Dughmosh, 32 and from Toronto, stopped at a neighbor’s apartment to drop off a parcel, the Toronto Sun reported.

“Five Qurans with a sealed letter inside one,” the neighbor, Noshaba Raheel, said. Dughmosh asked Raheel to “hold on to them” and said she “would be back soon.”

Dughmosh’s husband and their two small children left the house with luggage the next day, Raheel also told the paper.

Toronto police said nothing on Saturday about the attack. Three days later, on Tuesday afternoon, after the Sun got wind of what happened, police issued a skeleton news release saying nothing about the niqab, the ISIS bandana or the common jihadi cry of “Allahu Akbar.”

“There is no need for the public to be concerned about safety in any way, shape or form,” Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders said late Tuesday. “It was a very isolated situation.”

Canada’s joint terrorism task force, the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, seems to be taking the matter more seriously.

“When somebody is wearing ISIS markings and yelling ‘Allahu Akbar’ while swinging a golf club… you have to do everything necessary and treat it as a terror attack,” a source close to the team told the Sun.

“No stone will be left unturned in her life,” an unnamed officer from the team also said, “her family, her computer and phone, the state of her mental health, where she worships and her past travel.”

Canada’s two Toronto-based national newspapers, The Globe and Mail and National Post, carried stories on a man wielding a hammer Tuesday at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. The man shouted, “This is for Syria!” On the Toronto attack, The Globe and Mail has said nothing. The National Post ran three paragraphs, lifted from its sister publication the Sun.

Similarly, CBC television and radio have remained silent on the attack, although the CBC’s website covered the court appearance.

The Toronto Star carried a brief story with the headline, “Toronto woman charged with assault at Scarborough mall.” (The attack took place at Cedarbrae Mall in the city’s east end.)

The Star suppressed all references to ISIS, including Dughmosh’s court statement. “When asked to identify herself for the record, she instead made reference in Arabic to ‘the leader of the believers,’” the paper said.

Almost all details reaching the public come from the Toronto Sun, but even in its coverage, with the exception of the neighbor, only nameless, faceless “sources” appear.

Where Dughmosh is from, who she knew, where she prayed, who her husband is, where she lives, who the injured person is and how badly the person is hurt — none of the usual questions are answered.

The judge issued a publication ban on most of the details of her court appearance. Exceptions included Dughmosh’s decision to waive her right to a bail hearing and the fact that until her case is dealt with, she elected to stay in jail.

Ezra Levant of TheRebel.media reports on Justin Trudeau purchasing Broadway tickets for intentional tyrants in a move to win a UN Security Council seat. Cuba, China, Venezuela, Burma, and other murderous regimes were in attendance. MORE: https://www.therebel.media/ezra_levan…

“Trudeau is becoming a parody of an apologetic leftist who believes terrorism is our fault and zealous Islamists and jihadists are simply misunderstood.”

*****************************

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has come under fire for his response to the revelation that some workers at a major Canadian airport support Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).

An investigation showed ISIS propaganda videos were shared and promoted from workers’ social media accounts. One radicalized employee had direct access to runways at Montreal Pierre Elliot Trudeau International Airport (named for the prime minister’s father, who served as prime minister).

He has since been transferred to a different job at the airport where he has no access to runways.

Responding to a question asked by a reporter if people with extremist views should be allowed to continue working at the nation’s airports, Trudeau said:

“I think that’s part of the kind of conversations we have to have as a society. Keeping people safe is paramount important, but defending our rights and freedoms is as well, and making sure we do that in the right way.”

“You can’t make this stuff up. Trudeau wants to have a national conversation about whether terrorist sympathizers and ISIS supporters should be able to work in strategic locations at our national airports. He wants us to consider the rights and freedoms of terrorist sympathizers and ISIS supporters in order to strike the right balance between our safety and their freedom to do what? Support jihad?”

Malcolm added, “Trudeau is becoming a parody of an apologetic leftist who believes terrorism is our fault and zealous Islamists and jihadists are simply misunderstood.”

She cited previous comments by Trudeau who, in 2011, spoke out against the previous government’s use of the term “barbaric” in a guide to Canadian citizenship.

At the time, Trudeau objected to the language saying it was “too harsh” and told the government to make an “attempt at responsible neutrality.”

After tremendous criticism, he apologized and recanted his statement.

Malcolm also noted that after the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, Trudeau said in an interview on CBC, “There is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded. And our approach has to be, okay, where do those tensions come from?”

Another senior Muslim Canadian leader disagrees with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over the question whether Islam is compatible with secular values.

In two separate interviews with CBC, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau maintained that Islam is compatible with Western open and secular democracy like Canada:

(November 24, 2015): “Canadians are quick to point out that ISIS is wrong, that Islam is not incompatible with the Western secular democracy, a free place like Canada.”

(January31, 2016): “But on the other hand, we need to make sure that we’re working with communities like the Muslim community for example to demonstrate that Islam is not incompatible with free and open Western societies.”

Trudeau said that “the Reviving the Islamic Spirit [RIS] convention [in Toronto]… is also about celebrating our shared beliefs in justice, fairness, equality of opportunity and acceptance” and that the values of the month of Ramadan are the “principles upon which Canada is founded” and the “tenets of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

Unlike Trudeau, Mazin AbdulAdhim, a prominent Imam of Iraqi descent in London, Ontario who is affiliated with the radical Islamic global movement of Hizb ut-Tahrir, explains that “Islam cannot and will not ever become a part of liberal secularism.”

According to Mazin AbdulAdhim, nowadays there is a war between two ideologies, secularism and Islam, which will end up with the victory of Islam and the establishment of the Islamic State (Caliphate) which will regain control over the Muslim lands world-wide.

The following are excerpts from Mazin AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post on March 24, 2017:

The Jews and Christians are united with the atheists upon the liberal secular way of life today, and they demand that everyone join them in this way of life of theirs. Islam cannot and will not ever become a part of liberal secularism, no matter what ups and downs Muslims go through, and this has caused the Jews and Christians and atheists to take extreme manipulative measures to force Muslims to comply with their demands. This media pressure is simply a tool being used to force all Muslims to condemn the political and military laws of Islam in general by associating any crimes committed by Muslims with Islam itself (regardless of whether Islam obviously forbids it), to pressure them to submit to the liberal secular system that dominates the globe today and abandon the call for political Islam. Anyone demanding the implementation of the political and military laws of Islam will then be associated with those Muslims who committed those violent crimes, and will be treated as criminals by association… No matter what the manipulative secular elite do, they will fail at this manipulative scheme, and Islam will rise once again in the Muslim lands, and the Ummah [Muslims nation] will unite under a single sincere Islamic leadership; and the Muslim lands – including Africa, the Middle East, the subcontinent, parts of Europe, Central Asia, and parts of Eastern Asia – will be fully restored under complete Muslim control, and there is nothing the lying, fear-mongering scum of the Capitalist elite can do about it.

The following are excerpts from Mazin AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post on March 17, 2017:

It is important to understand that the West is undoubtedly heading towards banning political Islam…We need to understand that this is a struggle between two ideologies, not between countries or leaders or religions. It is a (mostly) silent war between secularism and Islam. Muslims win the moment they establish a true Khilafah [Islamic State or Caliphate], as that will be the end of the Sykes-Picot borders and puppet government control they have had over the Muslim lands for almost 100 years. And as Muslims inch closer to breaking free from the political control of the colonial West, we should expect to see them become more vicious against political Islam, and more friendly towards Muslims who accept secularism and defend it (called “moderates”)…

The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Canada is an Islamic national-wide organization striving “to build an Exemplary Canadian Muslim Community” by “total submission to Him [Allah] and through the propagation of true and universal message of Islam.”

Dr. Iqbal Massod Al-Nadvi, theAmir (President) of ICNA Canada, also serves as the Chairperson of Canadian Council of Imams (Canada’s top Imam).

On its official website ICNA Canada shares with its members, followers and supporters the book “Riyad us Saliheen” (“The Gardens of the Righteous” رياض الصالحين) compiled by Imam Zakaruya Yahya Bin Sharaf An-Nawawi, a Sunni Shafi’ite jurist and hadith scholar who lived in 13thcentury.

The Gardens of the Righteous (Arabic: Riyadh as-Salihin), is a compilation of verses from the Qur’an and hadith by Al-Nawawi. It contains a total of 1905 hadith divided across 372 chapters, many of which are introduced by verses of the Quran.

The book “Riyad us Saliheen” (“The Gardens of the Righteous”) which appearson ICNA Canada site cntains modern commentary to the verses from the Qur’an and hadith.

The following are excerpts from the book which deal with the question whether Islam in compatible with the values of Western democracy.

“Commentary: To affront and degrade the ruler means to disobey him and to by-pass his orders. This impairs his power, honour and dignity. Believers have been told to obey and support rulers for the sake of national interest and welfare, understanding that they desist from committing an overt disbelief and maintain congregation Salat and other duties of religion. The political system of Islam is totally incompatible with western democracy. The concept of government party and the opposition is alien to Islam. All belong to one Ummah with only one goal and pursue the same aims and objects of Islamic guidelines!”

Iran maintains a network of spies and lobbyists who clandestinely push the Islamic regime’s agenda in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere, according to the head of Iran’s ministry of intelligence, who touted the pro-Iran network’s ability to spread its ideology to the West.

Alavi disclosed that Iranians with dual citizenship in the United States, Canada, and England, remain devoted to the “Islamic revolution” and are working to promote this agenda in their adopted homelands.

In D.C., Alavi claimed, a “lobby group for the Islamic Republic of Iran” is working to bolster the regime’s international status and help legitimize its nuclear endeavors.

“They have a lobby group for the Islamic Republic of Iran which does not cost us money,” Alavi said, without naming the specific organization. “We should not accuse them and say things that discourage them about the ancestral homeland, this is not good, and losing this capital is not good for the regime.”

Iranian dual nationals living in the West remain devoted to the Islamic Republic, he added.

“It is wrong to say that all dual nationals are traitors, spies, or foreign agents; many of dual nationals love Iran, are a capital for Iran,” Alavi said. “Many who live in Canada, London, or the United States [are devoted] to the [Islamic] revolution and the supreme leader … In those places some attend religious ceremonies. [Those people] love the [Islamic] Revolution.”

While the Iranian official did not name the lobby group in question, the Free Beacon has reported during the past several months that dissident organizations are pushing for a formal investigation into the National Iranian American Council, or NIAC, which has long fought against charges that it lobbies on the regime’s behalf.

A group of nearly 100 prominent Iranian dissidents working to undermine the regime petitioned Congress in February to investigate NIAC’s ties to the Iranian regime and determine if it is actively helping to push a pro-mullah agenda.

“We write to request a congressional hearing on the efforts of Tehran’s theocratic regime to influence U.S. policy and public diplomacy toward Iran,” the dissidents wrote to Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) and Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), the heads of Congress’ foreign affair committees, according to copies of the letter first reported by the Free Beacon.

NIAC’s actions in favor of the Iran nuclear deal and increased diplomacy with Tehran also raised concerns in January, when the Free Beaconfirst reported that two high-level Iranian government backers, including a former Islamic Republic official and another accused of lobbying on Tehran’s behalf, had been hosted at the Obama White House for more than 30 meetings with top officials.

The meetings came at key points in the Obama administration’s outreach to Iran and efforts to push the nuclear deal.

Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser and expert on rogue regimes, raised concerns about Alavi’s recent remarks. He noted that organizations pushing Iran’s agenda in Washington are obligated to disclose their work under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, even if no money is exchanging hands as part of the relationship.

“The question to ask is whether there is daylight between the foreign policy positions of the Islamic Republic and those of groups of which the Iranian intelligence minister refers,” Rubin said.

“At the very least, it is worth asking whether any individual who is making a couple dozen meetings to the White House and even more to the State Department is acting as what the Iranian intelligence minister might consider a lobbyist,” Rubin added, referring to the former administration’s outreach to pro-Iran interests in the United States. “It’s not a witch-hunt, it’s a matter of law.”

Given Alavi’s recent disclosures, U.S. officials would be wise to “ask the motivations of those fundraising for any group that seems more interested in defending Iran’s ballistic missile work than in human rights and cultural freedom,” Rubin said.

Saeed Ghasseminejad, an Iranian dissident and associate fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the Free Beacon that several years ago Iran implemented a formal plan to “strengthen its ties with anti-war and pro-regime lobby groups.”

This included bolstering ties with Iranian dual nationals in the West and certain organizations in Europe and the United States to help “change the unfriendly governments’ policies and actions regarding the regime,” according to Ghasseminejad.

This network is tasked with discrediting Tehran’s opponents and stopping efforts to foster regime change in Iran, Ghasseminejad said.

“They are specifically concerned about any prospect of regime-change and cooperation between the U.S government and Iranian opposition groups,” he said.

Iran also wants these organizations to promote policies that benefit Iran and will help it garner international legitimacy, according to Ghasseminejad.